Moral Social Security
Annnnnnnnyway...
This fascinating article looks at the "moral" implications behind the pet conservative/libertarian cause of changing social security. You know, if the Cato Institute is behind it, it might not be half bad...
Conservatives used to speak derisively of liberal social engineering. The attempt to create private Social Security accounts is, so to speak, conservative social counter-engineering. Government should help provide for unforeseeable contingencies: tsunamis, unemployment, open-heart surgery. But if there is one event in all of human life that is wholly foreseeable, it is the advent of old age. Why, then, shouldn't people save for their own retirement, instead of relying on welfare from the government -- which is what Social Security, as currently constituted, really is?
Tanner argues that people who own assets behave differently and see their place in society in a different light. Private accounts, he says, would encourage a culture of saving and personal responsibility; they would discourage political class warfare; they may, he argues, improve work habits, and even reduce crime and other social pathologies. Create private Social Security accounts, and millions of low-income Americans will be stockholders and bondholders. Republican political activists look at the way portfolio investors vote -- and salivate at the prospect of millions more of them.
There's definitely something here. This idea of, "If we have assets, we feel empowered. We have a stake in society, and therefore politics. We might become a BETTER society!"
It's been said that young (18-25) people don't care about politics precisely because they have no stake in it. They don't have kids, they don't own property, and they don't really pay substantial taxes. Especially property, estate, or business taxes. Us young'uns USED to have a stake when there was the draft, but that was a hollow stake. "Our stake is that we might DIE!!!!"
"Dad's stake is that he's worried some new zoning law will prohibit him from building a pool."
Lame.
And even with the draft, it was still only the boys (and only white boys at that, for a long time) who had this stake. And not all the boys even wanted this stake. (See Vietnam.) In the late-1960s, young people collectively decided that we'd rather get high and bang girls at Berkeley than participate in this "glorious" stake. I certainly don't blame them for that. But, yeah. SS accounts in private hands. Maybe that would makes us more responsible. Maybe.
Young people kinda suck balls at saving. I can't imagine explaining to a bunch of 20-year-olds that suddenly they're going to be responsible for keeping track of their retirement funds. But, you know what? It's also hard explaining to a bunch of 55-year-olds in Ontario, CA that sooner or later, gays are going to be able to get married. Everyone has to sacrifice a little and learn something new from time to time. Why not hold everyone to a higher standard? For once.
4 Comments:
What you're talking about, though, is forced savings accounts or investment. It isn't entirely like personal responsibility because the Government is forcing me to invest my money. Yes, old age is totally forseeable, but that isn't really the entire point of social security is it? The real point is thaat if you lost all your money by getting cancer, or having a kid who gets hit by a car, or the company that should be paying your retirement went belly up, or in a big stock market crash, then there is a system in place so that if you are too old to work and recover from this then you can still support yourself. Old Age is forseeable, sure, but when unforseeable things happen to the elderly they are least able to rebound... hence Social Security.
I understand the desire to make people enter the stock market, and the attendant "personal responsibility" argument, but the stock market is anything but secure. Letting private investments into Social Security doesn't really remove the "security" part, does it? And then what's the point?
Maybe I'm not really one to talk, because I'm sure as hell not saving for my retirement right now. But I do know exactly how Social Security affects me because my Mom, who raised me by herself and really just barely scraped by to do it, will be retirement age soon. And I don't want to have to take her in and support her. I'm just getting on my feet and am incredibly happy that my mom will have her retirement to live off, and social security beyond that. It will keep her out of poverty as she ages and allow me the freedom to become a more productive member of society.
Social Security isn't about personal responsibility, it's about having a social safety net. It's what the government can do to provide a bare minimum existence for its citizens and to maintain a rising tide which can lift all boats, as the saying goes.
Yes, good point about the unpredictability of the stock market and all that. Maybe there's a middle ground for all this...Like, why can't SS just be voluntarily? Why is it all of one thing, or all of another?
Anyway, debating this seems so manufactured. Especially when we've got much bigger issues facing us down. I understand that we're now looking very closely at Iran. And SE Asia's still a mess.
You should care about SS because you give money to it and might not get it when it's your turn because the system is screwed up. I am going to be one pissed off old lady if I don't get mine back when I'm old. I don't even think my mom will make the cut off for when they'll run out. I think she's like the year after they run out, if I remember right. But I don't remember where I heard it.
Oh, I care about that facet of social security, which is why I don't want private accounts. If I want to invest money I will, but I don't want my safety net getting gambled away on the stock market. I would much rather take the small changes in taxation and/or benefits needed to keep the system stable as is than introduce a huge amount of risk (along with increasing our current deficits). I mean, the system is already stable for the next 40 or so years. If, in 20 years, we still have big problems then that will be the time for sweeping changes. As of now the system appears to work pretty well and just needs some tweaking.
Post a Comment
<< Home